I came to a place in my life around that time of 27, where I started to really notice the world was changing for the worst. The love and connection I felt with it seemed to be diminishing rapidly. From everything I had observed, the world was on a course of self-destruction. People were growing unhappier, more detached and judgmental by the minute. I asked myself what I could do, if anything.

I decided that I would never truly be happy unless I was doing something to counteract what was going on. I couldn't go on doing my own thing, caring as deeply as I did for the world, and watch it die. I had to do something. I decided that I would try to do something to save it. Yes, I know how it sounds, but that was my thinking.

It was a few months after I made this decision that God let me know He was there. He let me know that He was there, had always been there, that He loved me, and that I would be working for Him for now on.

I was open to the possibility of God existing, but not unless it was proven to me, and I would never have cracked open a bible to seek it out. I wasn't looking for God at all. God tapped me on the shoulder by His own volition. He revealed himself to me, despite the fact that I was an unbeliever.

Until He comes to you personally, and lets you know, you don't know Him at all. You can't conceive of Him. It seems like nonsense. There is a lot more going on in reality though than what you can see. From what I have witnessed, there is no way for any human mind to perceive God unless God decides to reveal Himself to that person, period. They will continue to believe whatever it is they believe until God decides, for whatever reason, that it's time. That time for many of you may never come

The point is, you can come up with the most solid logical proof, but this has nothing to do with your arguments or understanding. I wasn't religious, knew nothing about the bible, jesus or anything God related.

Friends - the above is not the entirety of tothesea's OP....but it is the gist of it - at least, the bits we all found important enough to reply to! It's all in order, as memory serves - maybe the mods would like to copy it back into the OP position?

Respect is to be earned, not given based on status. So far your god has not earned my respect because your god is responsible for so many atrocities. First, the flood. He didn't give a single person the chance to repent. Second, he is too busy touching tothesea to even care about the children who are starving to death and dying every single day because of a lack of nourishment. And third, well he really messed up this world he seems to love so dearly. Our own solar system is going to be destroyed in a few million years, that's if all the volcanoes and earthquakes, or disease, or wars don't destory us first. Your god has really messed up this creation he so loves. I hope we are only a prototype because to quote George Carlin "results like these don't belong on the resume of a supreme being"

Respect for God is between you and Him then tell all this to him, when you face him, and you will.

Rest assured, I will. I'll stand shoulder to shoulder with Emily and tell the bully just what I think of him. That "might does not make right." That respect is earned, not demanded with threats and passive-agressive whining.

Oh, he'll then send me to hell, because he is a pathetic bully who cannot stand to be told he is wrong, and he'll take great pleasure in it - as will all the little Christians hiding behind his skirts, too scared to challenge him, who "love" him because they fear what he will do to them if they ever dare question.

You may call that love. Many abused partners and children do.

And, BTW - learn to use quotes properly: you don't need to copy EVERYTHING to make a one line response.

Otherwise why do you and others get there hackles up. I think it is sad and funny, what we believe should not have any impact on you.....

You're right - it shouldn't. But sadly your deluded beliefs force their way into the law, into the classroom, into our lives, and THAT is why we oppose them. If your beliefs never left your living rooms, then none of us, I assure you, would have a problem. But your beliefs have made people's lives a misery for centuries, and continue to do so.

The brights are gradually forcing back the ignorance of the supers, and we've come a long way. But your narrow zealotry (manifested in a "believe in my loving god or BURN for all eternity") is still around, still forcing its way from your life into mine, and the lives of those I love.

THAT is why our "hackles are up". And that is why they'll stay up, until you take your goat-herder religion back inside your homes and churches and stop trying to force it on the rest of the world.

IbelieveinGod, welcome to the forum. I have modified some of your posts. Please take the time to read the Quoting FAQ. There is no need to quote an entire post when giving a short reply. If you wish to quote multiple points that use said in a comment then the quote function is wonder for that, but for one liners, or short paragraphs a simple '@' followed by the user you'd like to reply too is sometimes enough. The Quoting FAQ goes into detail about how to quote.

Respect for God is between you and Him then tell all this to him, when you face him, and you will.

Oh, I will tell him all of what I said, and more. I'll say, "Hey god. You can't blame me for not believing in you. You did stay very much hidden from your creation" amongst other things. Then I'll give him the finger.

Logged

"Great moments are born from great opportunities." Herb Brooks

I edit a lot of my posts. The reason being it to add content or to correct grammar/wording. All edits to remove wording get a strike through through the wording.

Can you explain why the above substitutions would not be equally valid, if stated by someone who had "direct experience" of Allah, Brahman, or Osiris?

>snip<

There is only One God. Logically, if the Universe was created, it all goes back to a single Source.

Yeah. If airplanes were created, logically they must have had one inventor. The Wright Brothers. Oops. But so what? You're avoiding the point. Why would the substitutions I made not be equally valid if stated by someone who had "direct experience" of Allah, Brahman, or Osiris, which would then "prove" that their One True God is the One True God as well as your revelation "proves" that yours is? Because there are people out there who say with equal conviction that they have had a Revelation of the Divinetm which turns out to be different from yours.

I never said or thought I was special above and beyond any other human being. God loves everyone, I love God, I love everyone too. I do not place myself above any other person.

Except that you didn't have to "seek God" or be "sincere" or anything like everybody else. The god you describe could, if it existed, do for everyone else what it did for you. It didn't, and according to the other things you've said, it won't. Out of 7 billion people currently living on Earth, you are the Chosen One. So, why you? Did your god hold a lottery or something?

Whaddaya mean "both?" When it comes to the issue of religion/spiritual belief, there are thousands of sides. I am the one that's been arguing for considering the various "sides" (i.e., differing claims of Divine Revelation and mystical experience) equally. You want us to privilege yours and yours alone with credulous, evidence-free acceptance. You want us to "sincerely" seek your god and yours alone. You cannot explain why we should not seek the Goddess of the Wiccans (and each one of the other deities people have believed in) with equal sincerity.

you would find abundant testimony from people all over the world from every faith and practice receiving revelation of Gods existence.

Yes, and most of the abundant testimony from all those faiths and practices contradicts yours. A lot of it says that Allah alone is God, he has no Son, and Allah is his prophet. A lot of it says that Brahman manifests in myriad forms (Krishna, Parvati, Shiva, Kali, etc., etc.). A lot of it backs up the teachings of the Buddha, and goes on to talk about Bardo realms and Bodhisattvas, etc., etc.. Then there are the revelations of the shamans, going back tens of thousands of years to the caves at Lascaux at least, telling of an alternate realm populated with therianthropic nature-spirits. I could go on. BTW, thus far I have demonstrated more knowledge of the various "sides" and the abundant testimony from people all over the world from different faiths and practices than you have. Likewise for my fellow commentators here. And you want to call us biased and insular in our beliefs?

Of course that isn't evidence for a keen mind such as yours, who apparently needs the Creator of the Universe to dance a little jig in front of you for your amusement before you would believe.

Nope. Just a pattern of behavior consistent with the attributes claimed for it. So, if the Creator is said to be both loving and omnipotent (especially if the "loving" attribute is supposed to be perfect and unconditional), then we should expect to see omnipotence being wielded in a loving way. If I were to claim that Superman was my roommate, that claim would have effects if it were true. There would be news footage of Superman saving people, shrugging off bullets when criminals shot at him, etc., because "Superman" has, in addition to his powers, the attribute of wanting to use them to save people. In the same way, an omnipotent, omnipresent Deity with a pattern of behavior guided by some principle (unconditional love, a thirst for domination, enjoyment of humans as tasty snacks, whatever) would be too big and important to miss. We would not find ourselves in a Cosmos that looks and behaves exactly the way it would if such an entity did not exist. You tell us that your god is unconditionally loving, but you can't point to a pattern of behavior on his part that manifests this, because he doesn't exhibit any behavior at all.

First of all, just because I said that the only way to know God is by direct revelation doesn't mean that you cannot seek out God and find Him yourself, which millions of people all over the world find out every day..

So which is it then? Either God must reveal itself to us (i.e., God is the active agent, as you allege in your own case), or we can "seek out God and find him" ourselves, thus we are the active agents and God's self-revelation is a triggered response. And, since "millions" of people every day find all sorts of different gods when they go a-seeking, we're back to the issue you have yet to respond to: why should we trust your inner revelation more than anyone else's?

The whole point of the gospel is to set you up, so to speak, to receive that revelation, which He does give abundantly. Your childish understanding of the gospel really shines here. Don't you know that when you are baptised by the Holy Spirit you have a personal relationship with the Creator? What happened to me is nothing new; the only thing that is different about it is that I wasn't looking for God. That isn't even new, because again, if you ever bothered to consider both sides equally, which you are loathe to do of course since you would no longer be the center of the Universe,

There you go again. Wherever would you get the idea that I (or any of the other atheists here) think we're the center of the Universe? Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler debunked that shit 500 years ago. We know that, as far as the Cosmos is concerned, we are sub-microscopic organisms living on a dust-mote within a little puff of dust we call the Milky Way, among a hundred billion or more similar puffs of dust, and that the Cosmos is profoundly Not About Us. You are the one who thinks that you are the crown of God's creation, the purpose for which the Cosmos was made, so that a hundred billion galaxies of a hundred billion (or more) stars each were forged to make your night sky pretty. You really need to stop projecting your own attitudes onto us. It doesn't help communication one bit.

Sure they do. I have received some pretty impressive visions myself after partaking of some psilocybin mushrooms.[1] I can confidently say that anyone here could partake of psilocybin mushrooms or LSD or Ayahuasca or DMT and experience as profound a mystical experience as anything you've had, or more so. Under controlled, laboratory conditions. So once again: why should we trust your revelations instead of the ones reported by Dr. Rick Strassman's volunteers, or Amazonian shamans, or people using Ganzfeld sensory deprivation or Lilly tanks or meditation techniques or Dervish-whirling, or, or, or...

Once again, the problem is: unbelievers (and believers of different stripes) do not receive visions that match yours, or each other's.

You miss the point, trying to test reality for God when your life itself is the test.

Oh, well, all right then. My life demonstrates that no gods exist. My Revelation, which happens moment by moment every second that I'm awake is of a Reality that is not haunted by Invisible Magic Persons of any sort--no angels, demons, djinn, faeries, gods, goddesses, burning bushes, talking snakes, wizards with magic powers, etc., etc., etc., and behaves--from the sub-atomic level all the way up to the cosmological--exactly the way a naturalistic Cosmos may be expected to behave. The difference between my Revelation and yours: you have to live and operate according to my Revelation[2] if you want to do so much as cross the street safely. You live in the same godless Universe I do. You can present no evidence whatsoever that I will ever have any use for yours.

My visions must be true, because a loving Creator would surely insert vision-making plants into the Creation so that the visionary state could be entered reliably and repeatably--no blind faith in ecclesiastical authorities or human-written books necessary!

It has nothing to do with luck or being special. It is all part of a grander design which science is unable to observe. A servant does not know his masters business. If he did, he would no longer be a servant. I need not join your nihilistic understanding and your futile ways, which all lead to death (..one of us..one of us..).

Says the guy who worships before the image of a man being brutally tortured to death as an act of atavistic blood sacrifice. Funny thing is, you believe that nihilism is true as far as reality is concerned, but if you pull the covers of Christianity over your head, you can hide from the Camus in the closet and the Sartre under your bed. I think nihilism is bunk. You're projecting, once again.

I know because of my experience, that the Creator is merciful and unconditionally loving, and will reveal Himself to anyone who asks sincerely and with an open heart.

And therefore, all those other people who believe other things (whether due to rational thinking or differing mystical revelations of their own) must not have asked sincerely and with an open heart. Therefore, they deserve to fry forever. Right? The nasty memetic trick here is to substitute morality for accuracy. We should believe in Christianity because if we don't we're "insincere" and have "closed hearts" (and are therefore naughty), not because we have determined that Christianity's claims about reality match the actual behavior of reality. Our motivation is to be guilt rather than a desire to know the truth, whatever it might be.

What foolishness it is to close that door; even you must admit that human knowledge is extremely limited, and even more limited than that, are our perceptual faculties. What a human being can discern at any given time does not measure up to the enormity of what is going on in the moment, regardless of how many definitions and labels man tries to abstract reality with.

Yes, absolutely. Which is why we must subject all of our conclusions, no matter how "sincere" we are in wanting them to be true, to rigorous reality-testing and critical thinking. If we want the most accurate understanding of reality possible, we need to take our most cherished, sincerely-held beliefs, and do our level best to prove them false (this includes engaging the arguments of others who reject our beliefs). If our beliefs can consistently withstand every assault of reason and reality-testing (observation, experiment) that can be hurled against them, then we can have increasing confidence that they accurately model Reality.

In the face of the profound ignorance and limited faculties that is the human condition (as you correctly state above), what greater folly could there possibly be than to seize upon some subjective human experience as you do, and cling to it with unswerving dogmatism?

There is something that is always beyond any words, that is God, which cannot be placed into a convenient little box for study and dissection. You don't have to take my word for it. You can experience it directly, first hand, at any time, once you give up the idea that you are qualified to rule out the Creators existence,

Oh, I quite agree that I ought not "rule out" the existence of your chosen deity, or anyone else's. I should always be willing to accept and test new data as it comes in. The confidence that I have in the non-existence of your deity comes from the fact that there is no evidence for its existence, and the evidence that does exist, contradicts the claims of Christianity and the Bible. Reality is not "in a little box for study and dissection." It is all around us, and utterly inescapable. If the claims of someone's private revelation (whether it be a Biblical author, you, a Hindu yogi, a Sufi master, an Amazonian shaman, whoever) conflict with the public revelation of external reality, reality wins. As Philip K. Dick put it, "reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."

What is true is already so.Owning up to it doesn't make it worse.Not being open about it doesn't make it go away.And because it's true, it is what is there to be interacted with.Anything untrue isn't there to be lived.People can stand what is true,for they are already enduring it.

Just because some people are misled in their beliefs, doesn't mean that there is no real truth out there.

Yes, but it means that we must have a methodology of testing the truth or falsehood of a belief. "Just knowing it in our hearts" doesn't work, because people "just know" all sorts of contradictory things "in their hearts." Thus far, the only methodologies that have actually, demonstrably worked for rooting out falsehood and converging on truth, are the methodologies of reason and the scientific method.

Man used to think the Earth was flat..did that mean the Earth wasn't round?

And how did we find out the Earth wasn't flat? Somebody's mystic revelation? Reading the Bible? Nope. By applying the scientific method to develop a set of observational tests whose results would be one thing if Earth was flat, and another if Earth was round, then performing the tests and letting the Earth itself (i.e., external Reality) be the final arbiter.

I don't need to have my experiences validated, nor does God have any need to be proven by scientists. What would be the point? If God wanted everyone to know unequivicably that He does exist He would simply just make an appearance.

So your god would prefer to deceive us by arranging things so that Reality behaves as if he does not exist. Why then, should we trust any subjective revelation that (allegedly) comes from such a deceptive god?

just like you cannot disprove Gods existence, you cannot rule out my experience either.

I can, if your truth-claims do not match the public revelation of Reality. If your experience purports to validate a Christianity that requires belief in Biblical inerrancy (you have not stated this yet, so that may not be the case), and the Bible asserts that Satan could show Jesus all of the kingdoms of the Earth from the vantage point of a high mountain, then the existence of a spherical Earth would rule out the claim that your experience is a genuine Divine revelation. It would also rule out the claim that "God," defined as an entity who, incarnate as Jesus, beheld all the kingdoms of the Earth from the vantage point of a high mountain, exists, since no such vantage point exists. It would not rule out definitions of "God" that are compatible with a spherical Earth.

You cannot disprove any of the thousands of other religions, or scientific Naturalism. Nor can you rule out the revelatory experiences behind all of the other religions, or the Reality-experiences that are consistent with scientific Naturalism.

The world makes sense to you? You mean science explains everything? What about the mind? Consciousness? Emotions? A million other things which are integral to life as we know it?

What about them? BTW, science does not have to "explain everything" before the things that it does explain can make sense. A blank spot on a map doesn't mean that you can draw in a sea serpent and write "Here Be Dragons," then smugly assert that dragons do, in fact, exist because you say so, and what you say is true because it's you saying it. Arrogant git.

Wow, I could hardly ask for a greater demonstration of your ignorance of science. Seriously, that's like saying "The Bible doesn't say much beyond 'And Jared lived an hundred sixty and two years, and he begat Enoch.'"

Concerning your debate and fictional characters, it is better to consider whether anything is "good" at all. By definition, only God *could* be good. Chew on that one.

Oh, Definition as Magical Incantation! By definition, only Goddess *could* be good. A finger pointing at the Moon is not the Moon. A god that can be written of in words is not the true God, therefore by definition the god of the Bible cannot be the true God.

See? I (and anyone else) can make unsubstantiated Magical Incantatory Definitions all day long.

Chew on that.

Logged

"The question of whether atheists are, you know, right, typically gets sidestepped in favor of what is apparently the much more compelling question of whether atheists are jerks."

Friends - the above is not the entirety of tothesea's OP....but it is the gist of it - at least, the bits we all found important enough to reply to! It's all in order, as memory serves - maybe the mods would like to copy it back into the OP position?

Thanks a lot for doing that, Anf. Much appreciated. The OP has been edited wth your reconstruction.

I thought I might get some half way intelligent argument, that was to much to hope for.

It really wasn't too much to hope for. The problem was, you started off short of a halfway intelligent conversation with emotional pleading, bad arguments we've seen a hundred times and lots of wrong assumptions. Garbage in, garbage out. If you would like to start over, I would suggest you read the Intro for Xians before you make another post. Hopefully that will help you acclimate.

For one thing I did not call anyone a name, since you said I was a nut bar, [call me what ever, I dont care] at least I know what type of person I am dealing with. I only feel sorry for you, God is real no matter what, I think we remind you that if we are right, you've got problems Otherwise why do you and others get there hackles up. I think it is sad and funny, what we believe should not have any impact on you, what you just said doesn't bother me, that is your opinion, and it is your right. I thought I might get some half way intelligent argument, that was to much to hope for. When you start name calling that just show what kind of person you are. I won't waste any more of my time.

Oh, grow up. We're all adults here. Are you so much of a coward you completely check out of a conversation as soon as somebody calls you a bad name? You come on here with Preachy Preacherton mode in full swing, offering NOTHING substantial in the way of debate and telling us we're DOOMED FOR ETERNITY because we dare not think like you... All I did was say you're crazy and rip your claims apart. So who's being a big meanie? And I'm supposed to respect you... Why? You EARN respect. It's not an entitlement. So far you've done nothing, absolutely nothing, to earn respect from anybody.

In what way was my arguement, or any of ours, not intelligent? Please point it out. Please address ANYTHING anybody has said besides how some faceless stranger on the internet hurt your sensitive widdle feelings.

This is such a weak excuse to avoid the issues at hand. And since you're obviously not capable of actually holding your own in a debate, I'm not terribly upset that you're tucking your tail between your legs and crying your way out of the corner you've backed yourself into.

How was YOUR post even an arguement in the first place? You just pop in out of the blue and start making these hollow and paper-thin proclamations about the nature of the universe and how we're all screwed whether we believe it or not. There was no arguement there. Just a lot of nutbar ranting to make yourself feel better.

And now many of us have shredded your "arguement" to pieces. Where's the in-depth response? I sure hope it's coming. Then again, maybe I don't, because you're clearly in over your head here.

So far you're batting a 0%. Step your game up and take it lke a man, or just go away.

And I get my "hackles" up because your religion is poisonous, and is hurting us as a species. I see it every single day; every time a kid dies because their parents tried to "pray" a disease away, everytime a terrorist explodes themselves, every time an abortion clinic goes up in flames, every time somebody is infected with AIDS because missionaries condemn condoms, every time a kid is molested, every time the progress of science is impeded, every time you try to corrupt the educational system, every time you try to get your primitive beliefs passed into LAW...

You want to know why I get my hackles up? Read the "Angry Atheist" thread on the main page. Educate yourself.

I thought I might get some half way intelligent argument, that was to much to hope for.

It really wasn't too much to hope for. The problem was, you started off short of a halfway intelligent conversation with emotional pleading, bad arguments we've seen a hundred times and lots of wrong assumptions. Garbage in, garbage out. If you would like to start over, I would suggest you read the Intro for Xians before you make another post. Hopefully that will help you acclimate.

Indeed. And I think he needs to take a few days and poke around the forum in general. He might realize that his mission statement has been "argued" once or twice before by far more articulate people with thicker skin and who are much better prepared. Might even pick up an effective tactic or two.

It's always so sad to see that threats and fear are all so many chrisitans have. If God is so real, where is the evidence? Why is there NONE? Why are Christians always limited to claiming coincidence and parlour tricks as "miracles"?

Logged

"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

I wasn't looking for God at all. ...He revealed himself to me, despite the fact that I was an unbeliever. Until He comes to you personally, and lets you know, you don't know Him at all.

Your experience had nothing to do with "ask(ing) sincerely and with an open heart" - you were sitting there, an unbeliever, not looking for God at all. So you have NO knowledge that "ask(ing) sincerely and with an open heart" will bring god to someone.

Is that why you deleted your original post? Because you realised it contradicted everything you wanted to say? Realised there were so many holes in your story that nobody would treat it with anything but (at best) amusement?

I wonder whether tothesea will be back...He sent me a PM on Friday saying he would answer some of my questions "tomorrow", but was using a library computer and had limited time.

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt for the moment, since I'm assuming libraries will be closed today and probably Monday as well, so if he didn't manage to get around to it yesterday he may, indeed, not have computer access right now.

Not that I see much hope of getting anything useful out of him, but it's been amusing, at least.

Really, it's about the most dishonest and slimey you can possibly get. Just shamefull. That s**t should qualify an insta-ban. Though I suppose crippling his ability to edit his posts is a solid choice too. At least it allows the possibility of future laughs if he comes back, and the deceitfulness of it is now immortalized in this thread for all to see, at any rate.

Bans are bad for business too I guess. These guys just LOVE to martyr themselves. "See!? Those atheists couldn't handle the TRUTH so THEY BANNED MEH!"

Stuff like this REALLY reflects poorly on his religion though. Not to mention the giant honking black mark on his personal integrity. Wonder why he did it. Did he think nobody would notice or something? :shrug

Otherwise why do you and others get there hackles up. I think it is sad and funny, what we believe should not have any impact on you.....

You're right - it shouldn't. But sadly your deluded beliefs force their way into the law, into the classroom, into our lives, and THAT is why we oppose them. If your beliefs never left your living rooms, then none of us, I assure you, would have a problem. But your beliefs have made people's lives a misery for centuries, and continue to do so.

The brights are gradually forcing back the ignorance of the supers, and we've come a long way. But your narrow zealotry (manifested in a "believe in my loving god or BURN for all eternity") is still around, still forcing its way from your life into mine, and the lives of those I love.

THAT is why our "hackles are up". And that is why they'll stay up, until you take your goat-herder religion back inside your homes and churches and stop trying to force it on the rest of the world.

I forgot to log off and every one thinks I am avoiding answering a question, no I am not. God made the world, and he expects people to do things his way. You will never get rid of Christianity, for 2000 yrs they have tried. every one wants logic and proof, my proof can't be your proof, it is my experience alone and you do not believe in God anyway, so what good does it do me to say anything. What you say about God does not bother me, he can handle that himself. If you want me to answer, give me respect or I will ignore you,I will give you the same respect, after all only our beliefs are different. Rules or no rules

Christianity probably wouldn't have made it if Constantine didn't declare it the official religion of the Roman Empire and, and Constantine's son's making the practice of other religions illegal. Hopefully the Christian religion, and all religions, will soon die and long be history. Nothing good has ever come from any religious teaching.

Logged

"Great moments are born from great opportunities." Herb Brooks

I edit a lot of my posts. The reason being it to add content or to correct grammar/wording. All edits to remove wording get a strike through through the wording.

If you want me to answer, give me respect or I will ignore you,I will give you the same respect, after all only our beliefs are different. Rules or no rules

If you want respect you must earn it. And if you won't follow the rules then fckoff, who needs you?

Logged

Truthfinder:the birds adapt and change through million of years in order to survive ,is that science, then cats should evolve also wings to better catch the birdsMailbag:On a side note, back in college before my conversion, I actually saw a demon sitting next to me in critical thinking class.

Since you ignored the many points of valid criticism against your assertions, I suppose that means you can't or won't reasonably respond.

If you can't, why do you still hold those ridiculous positions? If you won't, then why are you here?

Does your church consider it blasphemy or heresy that you believe your deity is not all knowing?

I forgot to log off last night and I can't find your thread I guess that is what you call it. This is a little confusing. What were they. Am I required to click quote or is there another way to get to the post reply screen. Believe me I will answer, but some time we need a little time.

Does your church consider it blasphemy or heresy that you believe your deity is not all knowing?

Quote

I forgot to log off last night and I can't find your thread I guess that is what you call it. This is a little confusing. What were they. Am I required to click quote or is there another way to get to the post reply screen. Believe me I will answer, but some time we need a little time.

The above bolded (and quoted) is the only question I've asked you that I am interested in having you answer.

With the rest I was referring to the debunking of your claims by Raymond. Do you undestand the criticisms, and why your assertions are considered baseless and devoid of critical thinking?

If you want me to answer, give me respect or I will ignore you,I will give you the same respect, after all only our beliefs are different. Rules or no rules

If you want respect you must earn it. And if you won't follow the rules then fckoff, who needs you?

I will give it to you and you have not earned it, your right though I don't need you. don't reply to me post then,

Same rules apply to me, we're in someone else's house and they make the rules, not me.

Logged

Truthfinder:the birds adapt and change through million of years in order to survive ,is that science, then cats should evolve also wings to better catch the birdsMailbag:On a side note, back in college before my conversion, I actually saw a demon sitting next to me in critical thinking class.

Am I required to click quote or is there another way to get to the post reply screen. Believe me I will answer, but some time we need a little time.

You can simply just click the reply button at the bottom of the screen. There is no need to quote an entire long post just to add a sentence. Notice how several members have only posted bits of your comments. I gave you a link to the quoting FAQ. I suggest you visit that page. It explains the proper way to quote. There is also a test area where you can test the multiple functions.